The November Elections

STOP

Early Journal Content on JSTOR, Free to Anyone in the World

This article is one of nearly 500,000 scholarly works digitized and made freely available to everyone in
the world by JSTOR.

Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other
writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the
mid-seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries.

We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this
resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non-commercial
purposes.

Read more about Early Journal Content at http://about.jstor.org/participate-jstor/individuals/early-
journal-content .

JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people
discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching
platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit
organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please
contact support@jstor.org.

AMERICAN GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

The November Elections. The most noteworthy results of the
thirty state elections in November were the reelection of Governor
Cox (Democrat) in Ohio and the apparent election of Senator Alfred E.
Smith (Democrat) in New York. Although the statewide prohibition
amendment was adopted in Ohio by a majority not far from 15,000,
Governor Cox, the candidate of the "wet" interests, defeated ex-
Governor Willis (Republican), the "dry" candidate, by about 10,000
majority. Willis' defeat is attributed chiefly to his alleged pro-German
utterances before the war. Governor Cox was the only Democratic
state officer reelected, the Democratic state auditor holding over for
two years more.

In New York on the face of the returns, Senator Smith had a plural-
ity around 12,000. For Governor Whitman's defeat, the following
reasons have been advanced: the exceptionally high standing of the
Democratic candidate both in point of ability and personal character
and popularity, reenforced by the resources and united support of
Tammany; the poorly concealed hostility of the " Old Guard" or Barnes-
Wadsworth faction, in combination with the "wet" interests who were
displeased with the governor's friendliness toward the federal prohibi-
tion amendment and his indorsement by the Prohibition party; the
widespread feeling that the governor had neglected his official duties
and perverted his office in order to promote his prospects for winning
the presidential nomination in 1920; and the disaffection of influential
agricultural organizations which hitherto have been stanch support-
ers of the Republican administration. The only other successful Dem-
ocrat on the state ticket was the candidate for lieutenant governor.
The legislature has a Republican majority in both houses, and for the
first time two women have been elected to the assembly. Under a
recent noteworthy amendment to the New York election laws, a fresh
set of election officers went on duty as soon as the polls closed in order
to relieve the polling officials who had been on duty all day of the ardu-
ous task of counting the ballots and making the returns. The innova-
tion is reported to have worked well, and apparently deserves to be
widely copied.

78

AMERICAN GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS 79

For the first time in New York history, women participated in a gen-
eral election on a footing of equality with male voters. In New York
City nearly half a million women took the trouble to register, and in
the state as a whole it is estimated that not far from a million women
qualified as voters. Full suffrage for women was adopted in Michigan
and in South Dakota. In Oklahoma there was a large majority in
favor of full suffrage; but the constitution requires a majority of the
total vote cast at the election, and, according to the secretary of state,
there has been some uncertainty as to what constituted the total vote,
although indications are that the measure has been adopted. Woman
suffrage was defeated in Florida, and also in Louisiana by the New Or-
leans vote, although a majority of the voters outside the city seem to
have favored the suffrage amendment.

The attitude of legislative candidates toward the federal prohibition
amendment played an important, though not very conspicuous, part
in many of the state elections. Although complete data on this point
is not at hand, it appears certain that several of the newly elected leg-
islatures will ratify the federal amendment; and it appears safe to in-
clude in this forecast California, Colorado, Illinois, Ohio, New York
and Vermont. The last state, like Ohio, elected on the same day a
"wet" governor and a "dry" legislature. Statewide prohibition
amendments were adopted in Florida, Nevada, Ohio, Wyoming, and
were defeated in California, Missouri, and in Minnesota by only 756
votes. Although prohibition won in Ohio, the "wets" were successful
in carrying a unique constitutional amendment reserving to the people
the power to approve or reject an action of the general assembly "rat-
ifying any proposed amendment to the constitution of the United
States." If the "wets" invoke such a referendum after ratification of
the federal prohibition amendment, as seems to be their intention, some
interesting questions of constitutional law are likely to be raised.

Nineteen constitutional amendments, submitted by the constitu-
tional convention, were approved by the voters of Massachusetts.
Most important among these were the amendments providing for a
restricted form of the initiative and referendum, biennial state elections
to begin in 1920, and empowering the legislature to enact a compulsory
voting law. North Dakota is believed to be the only other state with
such a constitutional provision as the last named, but no legislation
has been enacted under it.

Despite obstacles rendering it difficult if not impossible for voters
absent with the American expeditionary forces in Europe to take ad-

80 THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW

vantage of the absent-voting laws enacted by a large number of states,
it appears that a good many thousand soldiers voted in the various
cantonments in this country. An investigation of the operation of
both civilian and military absent-voting laws in this election might
furnish material for an interesting study.

Until ten days before the election, the congressional campaign was
extraordinarily dull and lifeless, due in part to popular interest in the
war, the liberty loan campaign, the influenza epidemic, and to the ab-
sence of any outstanding issue between the two leading parties. In the
house elections there was a total of 51 party changes, in which the
Republicans gained 38 seats (mainly in the middle-west) and the Dem-
ocrats 13 (mainly in the east). 1

In the senatorial contests the Democrats lost seats in Colorado,
Delaware, Illinois, Kansas, Missouri and New Jersey. In Massachu-
setts ex-Governor Walsh (Democrat) defeated Senator Weeks, the first
time that a Democrat has been elected to the senate from that state
since Robert Rantoul was elected in 1850. This Democratic success in
New England was offset by the Republican success in Missouri, where
Judge S. P. Spencer defeated ex-Governor John W. Folk.

As a result of these changes, the next Congress will comprise in the
house 238 Republicans, 193 Democrats, 2 independents, 1 Socialist,
and 1 Prohibitionist, giving the Republicans a clear majority of 41 ; in
the senate the party division will be 49 Republicans and 47 Democrats,
a Republican majority of 2 replacing the present Democratic majority
of 8.

This party overturn is in reality less impressive than might be in-
ferred from the size of the Republican house majority. In no section
of the country, unless Ohio and Kansas may be regarded as exceptions,

1 These figures are based upon the "Unofficial List" of members of the 66th
Congress, compiled by the clerk of the house, dated November 14. A few
seats are likely to be contested.

The Republican gains were distributed as follows : six in Ohio, four in Indiana
and Kansas, three in New York, Pennsylvania, Missouri and Nebraska, two in
Colorado, and one in California, Delaware, Illinois, Kentucky, Maryland, Michi-
gan, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Washington and West Virginia. The Demo-
cratic gains were made in the following states: five in New York, three in New
Jersey, two in Pennsylvania, and one in California, Nevada, and Oklahoma.

The large Democratic gain in New York was partly due to the fusion be-
tween Republicans and Democrats in certain New York City districts in order
to prevent the election of Socialist candidates.

AMERICAN GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS 81

occurred anything which may fairly be called a Republican landslide,
and the Democratic mortality does not appear to be far from the nor-
mal expectancy for the party in power in an "off-year" election.

To produce this party change in the control of Congress so many fac-
tors contributed in such varying degrees and combinations in different
sections as to preclude the confident offering of any simple formula by
way of explanation. Insufficient data is at hand to warrant even a very
satisfactory tentative appraisal of the various factors. They may be
indicated, however, and some suggestion made respecting their possible
influence. In the enumeration which follows, the less important fac-
tors or those whose influence seems to have been confined to relatively
small areas will be noted first.

(1) Resentment at the treatment accorded by the administration to
General Leonard Wood, in command at Camp Funston, has been men-
tioned as not without its influence in Kansas and possibly other states.

(2) Opposition on the part of influential publishers organizations to
the enactment of the postal zone law was an inconspicuous factor, but
one which, in the opinion of an important official in such organizations,
assisted in the defeat of 59 congressmen.

(3) The Socialist party seems to have been a factor of only negative
importance. Fear of its possible success had much to do with the fusion
of Republicans and Democrats in certain New York City districts. The
Socialist congressional candidates in twelve Manhattan districts were
all defeated, including Meyer London, the only Socialist in the present
Congress, and Morris Hillquit who ran for mayor of New York in 1917.
Victor Berger of Milwaukee will be the only Socialist in the 66th
Congress.

(4) The Non-Partisan League was undoubtedly a factor of impor-
tance in state elections, and apparently also in congressional elections in
North Dakota, Montana, Minnesota, Nebraska, and perhaps in other
states. In spite of the charges of disloyalty which have been preferred
against some of the officials of the league, its influence does not appear
to be growing less, at least not in North Dakota, the state of its earliest
successes.

(5) Woman suffrage organizations were active in several senatorial
contests, but it is difficult to find justification for the claim that the
general result of the election is a strong rebuke to the Democratic
party for its treatment of the federal suffrage amendment. The oppo-
sition of the suffragists seems to have contributed in some measure to
the defeat of Senator Weeks (Republican) in Massachusetts and Senator

82 THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW

Saulsbury (Democrat) in Delaware, both of whom had opposed the
federal amendment. Suffragist opposition to the reelection of Senators
Baird of New Jersey (Republican) and Borah of Idaho (Republican) and
to the election of Mr. Moses (Republican) in New Hampshire, whose
position was doubtful, apparently caused these candidates to run behind
their party tickets. At the same time new senators favorable to the
suffrage amendment were elected in South Carolina, Kentucky and New
Jersey.

(6) The voting record of congressional candidates for reelection, on
the principal preparedness and war measures in the 64th Congress and
two such measures in the 65th Congress, figured prominently in many
districts, including at least three Iowa districts where unsuccessful ef-
forts were made to defeat the present Republican members of the
house on the ground that they had not supported all the war measures.
The work of the National Security League deserves mention in this con-
nection. The league circulated widely a chart showing the voting
records of members of the house on preparedness and war legislation.
On the league's "Roll of Honor," which included the names of those
who had voted "right" on all eight test measures, were 47 names,
of whom 43 were Republicans and 4 were Democrats; 7 of these
were not renominated, 3 were defeated and 37 were elected. Of the
117 candidates who voted "wrong" on from five to eight of the test
measures in both Congresses, 24 were not renominated, 79 were elected,
of whom 53 came from the South, and 14 were defeated. Of the 20
members of the 65th Congress only, who voted "wrong" on the two
measures coming before that Congress, 7 were not renominated, 10 were
elected, of whom 5 were from the South, and 3 were defeated.

(7) Resentment at congressional price-fixing for wheat was clearly
a factor in Kansas, and probably in other wheat-producing states. This
legislation was associated in the public mind with Southern influence in
Congress which prevented price-fixing legislation for cotton, and with
the operation of the seniority rule in house committee assignments
whereby Southern representatives who held more or less pronounced
pacifist views were at the head of important committees. Republican
gains were mainly in the rural districts of the middle-west.

(8) Taxation is never relished, and the policy of imposing heavy war
taxes inevitably incurred opposition. To this was added charges of
sectionalism in the revenue measures. The indiscreet declaration of
the Southern chairman of the committee on ways and means to the ef-

AMERICAN GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS 83

feet that the North having forced the country into the war should pay
the bill, was given wide circulation by the Republican press and leaders,
and it probably had something, and in the opinion of the New York
Times had much, to do with the Democratic defeat. Mention may
also be made of the wide dissatisfaction in business circles with the
present Congress for its dilatoriness during the last session in preparing
the new war revenue act, a circumstance which led one of the most loyal
of administration newspapers to characterize Congress as "our one
great slacker."

(9) Presidential influence was openly exerted in the congressional
primaries and elections to defeat Democratic senators and representa-
tives who had voted against administration measures or who had been
more or less outspoken in their criticisms of administrative policies.
Apparently in large measure as a result of executive condemnation, ex-
Governor Blease of South Carolina, running for the senatorial nomina-
tion, and Senators Vardaman of Mississippi and Hardwick of Georgia,
and also Representatives McLemore and Slayton of Texas were de-
feated in the primaries. On the other hand, Representative Huddle-
ston of Alabama won renomination and reelection in spite of executive
opposition vigorously expressed. The President likewise actively but
unsuccessfully intervened in behalf of Democratic senatorial candidates
in Rhode Island, New Jersey, New Mexico and Michigan. In other
states senatorial candidates appealed for support on the ground that
they were loyal administration men, notably in Illinois and Missouri,
and in the absence of any executive disavowal, the public inferred that
they were administration candidates. The President indorsed the re-
election of Senator Nelson (Republican) from Minnesota, and no Dem-
ocratic candidate was formally nominated in that state.

The foregoing enumeration is believed to include the principal factors
in the campaign until shortly before the election. Taken singly, or
even in certain possible combinations, they hardly account for the party
overturn either in Congress as a whole or in more than a few states and
districts. In the aggregate there was a good deal of dissatisfaction
with the record of Congress and with some actions of the administra-
tion; but it was widely diffused and generally uncrystallized. The ad-
ministration had been in the main accorded loyal support by Republican
as well as Democratic party leaders, while among the rank and file party
lines had become indistinct. Even the President's activity in particu-
lar cases in the primaries and elections provoked little more than local

84 THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW

resentment, for the public has come to regard such action as a defensible
exercise of the President's functions as a party leader. Such seemed to
be the state of the public mind that thousands of more or less dissatisfied
voters might have allowed the election to go by default or have voted
for Democratic candidates.

But new factors entered during the last few weeks of the campaign.
The correspondence with the German government was openly criti-
cized, and as the prospects for peace developed it became more evident
that the President could not count on the same degree of united sup-
port for the problems of peace and reconstruction as for the conduct of
the war. Under these circumstances the President issued a frank ap-
peal for the election of a Democratic Congress, in order to maintain
unity of action in the government.

This appeal had the immediate effect of arousing the open antagon-
ism of Republican leaders, dispelled the apathy which had character-
ized the campaign up to that time, and tended to stiffen party lines and
to arouse party zeal and enthusiasm. T<5 some it has seemed the main
factor in crystallizing the latent elements of dissatisfaction, and in
repelling Republican and independent voters who were hesitating as to
the course they should follow. It appears that, at least in some sec-
tions, Democratic managers regarded the President's action as a liability
rather than an asset.

On the other hand it has been argued that the President's appeal
served to prevent a still more serious defeat for his party. Reference
was made to similar appeals by Republicans, as in the campaign of 1898
and Lincoln's adage about swapping horses, in the campaign of 1864.
As between these conflicting interpretations it is difficult, if not impos-
sible, to make a clear decision. But the sectional distribution of party
gains and losses indicates that local rather than general factors were
of most importance in the result

If any single generalization seems justified, the result of the election
should be regarded less as a Republican victory than as a rebuke to the
Democratic party. It is certain that the Republicans have received no
mandate to engage in merely destructive criticism or obstructive tactics
toward administration measures, and the party has yet to develop an
effective leadership or constructive program of its own for the prob-
lems to be faced.

The Republican party will be on probation for the next two years.
Its first real opportunity to serve the nation and incidentally itself —

AMERICAN GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS 85

an opportunity which is at once a measure of its duty and responsibility
— will present itself in connection with the reform of congressional or-
ganization and procedure. By setting aside the seniority rule in com-
mittee assignments, by discontinuing useless committees and the spoils
incident to the present committee system, by insuring publicity for
caucus and committee proceedings, and by substituting an effective
budget system for the present lax, wasteful, and uncorrelated methods
of handling financial legislation, the party will strengthen itself with the
increasingly large body of independent voters. Before attempting to
reconstruct the nation, Congress should take up boldly and courageously
the task of reconstructing itself.

P. Orman Ray.
Northwestern University.

Proposed Governmental Changes in Pennsylvania. — The revision
of the Philadelphia city charter and of the constitution of Pennsylvania is
now being actively discussed. The Committee of Seventy, a local civic
organization, has called a general conference on the city charter. A
wide participation by leaders in civic life is promised. Public attention
is directed towards the desirability of a smaller city council with a
single body to supplant the larger bicameral councils that have per-
sisted in Philadelphia despite changes elsewhere.

It is also possible that an extension of the home rule principle may be
worked out to give the city greater freedom of action on important local
questions. Other features of modern municipal advance will undoubt-
edly receive consideration, such as the short ballot and authority to
make use of excess condemnation in connection with proposed public
works. By such condemnations the city government and treasury
would expect to share in the increases in property values that go with
public improvements. Philadelphia has lost the opportunity to do
this in connection with the extensive boulevard plans now under way,
but the right would be of value in the proposed Delaware River bridge
construction, the location of which has just been recommended to the
joint New Jersey-Pennsylvania Bridge Commission. A part of the
cost of this structure could be provided for by allowing the city to con-
demn and acquire large sections of the surrounding real estate at the
Philadelphia end of the bridge and to hold or resell this property.

The charter revision movement has received added impetus from the
vital question of subway construction and from the unprecedented ex-